W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > November 2001

RE: Issue rdf-equivalent-representations

From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2001 15:54:54 +0000
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20011115154426.04101960@joy.songbird.com>
To: "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: "Brian McBride" <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, "rdf core" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
At 02:50 PM 11/15/01 +0000, Jeremy Carroll wrote:
>+ there are a number of adequate fixes with adequate backwardly compatible
>behaviour. Viz -
>    a. mandate that all fragment URIs of a particular URI are in fact bNode's
>and not real URIs e.g. http://www.w3.org/2001/11/rdf/bnode#b1
>
>    b. suggest use of processing instruction
>       e.g. <?rdf-fake-uri http://www.w3.org/2001/11/rdf/bnode?>
>
>    c. use of new attribute rdf:local
>
>
>
>Anyone care to push me over the edge?

I'm not going to push one way or the other;  I understand the attraction of 
fixing this, but I also understand the charter has a purpose.

BUT, if we do decide to fix this, I don't like solution (a) or (b).

However, something like:

    <rdf:Description rdf:local="node"> ...
     :
    <ex:property rdf:local="node" />

seems quite regular and OK.  Also, it suggests, if needed:

    <rdf:Description rdf:local="node" rdf:literal="literalchars"> ...
     :
    <ex:property rdf:local="node">literalchars</ex:property>

#g


------------------------------------------------------------
Graham Klyne                    MIMEsweeper Group
Strategic Research              <http://www.mimesweeper.com>
<Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
       __
      /\ \
     /  \ \
    / /\ \ \
   / / /\ \ \
  / / /__\_\ \
/ / /________\
\/___________/
Received on Thursday, 15 November 2001 11:27:39 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:42:41 EDT